Incorporating local nature-based cultural values into biodiversity No Net Loss strategies

Griffiths, Victoria F.; Bull, Joseph W.; Baker, Julia; Infield, Mark; Roe, Dilys; Nalwanga, Dianah; Byaruhanga, Achilles; Milner‐Gulland, E.J.

doi:10.1016/j.worlddev.2019.104858

Cited by 22 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 49 publications

(71 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Exclusion of the word social from the word construct of the term is equated to exclusion of social compensations within BO implementation, and thus partly a reason for the absence of social compensations during BOs implementation in Uganda. There is growing criticism of the limited or lack of focus on social compensations among scholars (Maron et al 2016 ; Gelcich et al 2017 ; Bidaud et al 2018 ; Griffiths et al 2020 ). Offsets relocate nature away from people and cities, changing the ecosystem services they obtain in a local area (Kalliolevo et al 2021 ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

‘Old wine in a new bottle’: conceptualization of biodiversity offsets among environmental practitioners in Uganda

Kigonya

2022

Environmental Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Biodiversity offsets are increasingly adopted to mitigate the negative impacts of development activities on biodiversity. However, in practice, there are inconsistencies in how biodiversity offsets are understood and implemented. Based on interviews with environmental practitioners, the study sought to explore the conceptual understanding of biodiversity offsets among personnel involved in the design and implementation of offset schemes in Uganda. The study employed a ‘technical use analysis’ to seek personal interpretation and operationalization of the concept of biodiversity offsets. The results revealed that the concept tends to be simplified and adjusted to individual, project, and country contexts. The respondents had varied perceptions of biodiversity offsets in practice as compared to the theoretical concept. Biodiversity offsets were classified under five terms: trade-offs, payments, substitutes, compensations, and mitigation measures. The terms were derived from perceived inability of the measure to attain no net loss, and similarities of biodiversity components and services across impact and offset sites. Biodiversity offsets were thus considered no different from ordinary environmental conservation measures, contributing nothing unique to the conservation agenda. The study concludes that widespread implementation of biodiversity offsets under prevailing perceptions will escalate biodiversity loss. The study recommends emphasis on attaining no net loss through implementing outcome-based offsets as opposed to purpose-based offsets, that require delivering of ‘no net loss’ gains prior to projects being considered biodiversity offsets.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

‘Old wine in a new bottle’: conceptualization of biodiversity offsets among environmental practitioners in Uganda

Kigonya

2022

Environmental Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Given that transformative change is often stymied by top-down management, resource mobilization may be better implemented using multiple working groups to identify nations that are willing partners, specific institutions within countries that are best positioned to act, and projects that garner grassroots support (Abson et al 2017 ). It is not yet clear how much political will and institutional capacity international actors such as the CBD have to work with a greater diversity of nonstate groups and local people (Griffiths et al 2020 ). It is clear that the secretariat cannot accomplish post-2020 resource mobilization work without bold new actions.…”

Section: Step 5: Scale Up Resource Mobilizationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Five Steps to Inject Transformative Change into the Post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework

Grumbine

2021

BioScience

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Accelerating declines in biodiversity and unmet targets in the Convention on Biological Diversity's 2010–2020 Strategic Plan for Biodiversity are stimulating widespread calls for transformative change. Such change includes societal transitions toward sustainability, as well as in specific content of the CBD's draft Post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework. We summarize research on transformative change and its links to biodiversity conservation, and discuss how it may influence the work of the CBD. We identify five steps to inject transformative change into the design and implementation of a new post-2020 framework: Pay attention to lessons learned from transitions research, plan for climate change, reframe area-based conservation, scale up biodiversity mainstreaming, and increase resources. These actions will transform the very nature of work under the CBD; a convention based on voluntary implementation by countries and facilitated by international administrators and experts must now accommodate a broader range of participants including businesses, Indigenous peoples, and multiple nonstate actors.

show abstract

“…Beyond disasters, given the devastation produced by large-scale construction projects, there are calls for greater awareness of the importance of religious and spiritual places as vital components of human well-being. Broadly categorised as cultural heritage, Griffiths et al (2020) emphasise understanding the importance of nature-based cultural values including religious and sacred places to people's well-being while implementing large development projects. They also conclude that these values differ between people and groups of people.…”

Section: Religion Survived the Onslaught Of Various Ideological And Political Challengesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Disasters and Religious Institutions

Cheema¹

2021

Islam and Global Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Disasters and Religious Institutions IntroductionDisasters give rise to a situation where people from different parts of the world, quite unfamiliar with each other, come into contact to save lives, provide necessities such as food and shelter, rebuild homes and enable community recovery. Humanitarian and development organisations have concerns about how to keep neutrality, stay safe, ensure respect for local sensitivities and win the necessary support of communities to carry out their job. In many places, during these hard times, community-based religious institutions such as churches, mosques and temples are still but a practical choice for reaching people living nearby to fulfil their needs (Feener & Fountain, 2018;Ngin et al., 2020). Mostly, run by communities through charity in a decentralised manner, these institutions and organisations enjoy community trust and ownership (A. R. Cheema et al., 2014;Gianisa & Le De, 2018). This chapter presents an overview of religious views and approaches to disasters and why religious institutions remain an important stakeholder during and before disasters. Also, it covers some of the key challenges that hinder an effective engagement between religious institutions and large international and national humanitarian organisations.

show abstract

Incorporating local nature-based cultural values into biodiversity No Net Loss strategies

Cited by 22 publications

References 49 publications

‘Old wine in a new bottle’: conceptualization of biodiversity offsets among environmental practitioners in Uganda

‘Old wine in a new bottle’: conceptualization of biodiversity offsets among environmental practitioners in Uganda

Five Steps to Inject Transformative Change into the Post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework

Disasters and Religious Institutions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About